Deterrence vs. Retribution

Difference Between Deterrence and Retribution

Deterrence and Retribution are two legal terms that are often thought to mean one and the same concept, but there is a severe difference between the two. The deterrence is something that prevents and stops someone from doing something wrong. It stops him from doing anything wrong. On the other hand the retribution causes and creates pain with the intention behind the act. This is the main difference between the two legal terms.

Deterrence alerts the person who made a mistake earlier not to commit the same wrong again. This sounds a note of caution on the man who did something wrong. On the other hand the person causing and inflicting pain in others by retribution does so as part of sadism. The man is sadistic in its approach.

On the other hand the concept of deterrence does not include sadism. The person will just be warned in case of deterrence that he will receive the same kind of punishment as he received earlier for committing a wrong deed of a similar nature false.

It is interesting to note that deterrence is a kind of lesson to others also in the sense that it automatically notifies the men who does anything wrong about f the consequences of the wrong deeds. Moderation is now an act of prevention and warning.

Retribution is however a situation where you get even with the offender. Retribution is sometimes regarded as an act of revenge in some countries. It is important to believe that the retribution affects the victim who occasionally is dead and sometimes it does not directly affect family members of the victim dead.

As part of summarizing the difference between deterrence and retribution can be said that the act of retribution is something like getting even with the criminal while the act of deterrence does something to the criminal, something that is done to the criminal in relation to crime prevention.


Category: VS  |  Tags: